The results of local elections in England so far are good for Labour, without being great. Labor has done well in London but not so well elsewhere. The Conservatives have fared poorly in areas with many graduates, but have actually gained support in areas with few graduates.
In London Labor has gained control of visible and symbolic councils: Westminster, which has never been Labor; Wandsworth, a Tory beacon of low council taxes; and Barnet, with a significant Jewish population. In any case, the change is mainly due to Tory votes falling more than Labor votes rising, but it’s the difference between the two that matters most and Labor has been disappointed on these points on so many occasions been.
Two immediate responses to these results can both be true. First, these are good results for Keir Starmer. Second, it is not the results that predict a Labor majority in the next general election. However, Labor does not need to win a majority for Starmer to become Prime Minister and these local elections are consistent with the Conservatives losing their majority in Parliament.
What is decisive in a two-party system is the difference in the share of votes between the two largest parties. The results of England’s local elections suggest that Labor is doing a little less well than national opinion polls suggest, but would still be ahead of the Conservatives if people had voted everywhere.
There are big regional differences and some big differences related to Brexit. Labor number crunchers claim the party won the most local votes in a number of general constituencies that voted Leave (and Tory) in the last general election, including Copeland, Hartlepool, Leigh, Peterborough, four seats in the West Midlands, Worcester and Workington.
But Labor hasn’t made any major council gains in leave-voting areas – apart from taking control of Cumberland – and Sky’s analysis of the education gap between college graduate and non-graduate sectors suggests that the rebalancing of policy by which the Tories Labor as replace, party of non-grad Leave voters suggests working class will continue.
The other feature of this shift is that Labor is not the only beneficiary of the opposite trend, with middle-class college-educated Remainers leaving the Tories. Sky’s analysis suggests that the Liberal Democrats, not Labour, have gained in the graduate sectors and Ed Davey has certainly had a good night despite his party gaining control of lower-level councils.
Nor are the Liberal Democrats the only contenders for the conservative Remainers’ votes: the Greens have also gained ground, although not as much as some Labor strategists had feared.
Local elections are not a reliable indicator of what might happen in a subsequent general election – although Tony Blair and David Cameron both had huge local vote leads before 1997 and 2010 – largely because things happen.
But if the things likely to happen in the next two years are an unprecedented drop in living standards and a faltering economy, Boris Johnson cannot count on the usual swing-swingback rhythm in party support.
If yesterday’s local elections were turned into general elections, the result – apart from the lower turnout – would be a parliament in which Keir Starmer would be prime minister.
There is a big difference in the perception of a deadlocked Parliament, where Starmer needs the tacit support of the Scottish National Party – which would be willing because they cannot facilitate a Tory government – and one where he could rely solely on the Liberal Democrats a majority, but the exact allocation of seats is unpredictable at this distance.
What matters is that Starmer would become Prime Minister if the Conservatives could be stripped of a majority in a House of Commons where they have no allies.
These local elections suggest that this is entirely possible.
